Data Collection Site 2

Any serious student of can trash will quickly begin using the terms "can density" and "can diversity."  While our first can sampling site had very high can density, our second site was notable for its can diversity.  At our second site, we identified 36 different species of can.  More importantly, however, there were fully 10 different brands of can for which we recorded at least 10 cans.  Given this diversity our reader will probably not be surprised to hear that there were some surprises in the data.  But before getting into the details, let's look at the totals and divide things up by genera:  We counted 278 beer cans, 65 caffeine cans, and 10 fruit cans, for a total of 344 cans.

Starting with the largest data category, we counted 18 species of beer, two more than at our other site.  Half of them did not qualify as "important" (at least five cans).  These were Icehouse, Michelob Ultra, PBR, Miller Lite, Coors, Steel Reserve 211, Modelo, Miller High Life, and Redds Strawberry Ale.  The other nine made our pie chart.  And this is where the surprises begin.  At our first site, Milwaukee's Best made up almost 60% of the trash; at this site, it was barely 6%.  (I immediately drove to the local convenience store—the Maverik—and found that a 12 can suitcase of the Beast was $7.49.  Ah-ha.  That is less than you'd pay at the TA, but more than you'd pay for Natty Light at the Maverik.)  But what really stands out is the Fosters Lager.  Out of nowhere it jumps to 9% of the beer trash.  And with no suitcases.  You may buy Fosters at the convenience store.  But only by the can.  You can buy one can at a time.  And it costs more than $2.50 per can.  The cans are large, but still . . . this is one of the mysteries of our study and one which cries out for further research.

Moving on to the other families, you'll notice that the non-beer population is slightly more important at this site than it was in our earlier data set.  The caffeine and fruit categories combined make up nearly 20% of our data from this site, but that is partly because there are fewer cans overall.  Perhaps a better way to compare sites is to look at another metric:  trash/linear foot.  At our first site, there was a non-beer aluminum can every 152 feet; at our second site, that dumping rate had increased to one can for every 120 feet of road.  The other surprise here was that Pepsi and Mountain Dew switched places.  At our first site, Mountain Dew lead the caffeine family by a fairly wide margin over the number two choice, Pepsi.  At the second site, Pepsi was on top, with Mountain Dew falling to third.  This battle between Pepsi and Mountain Dew, though, really was the story of the caffeine data—at least from our small data set.  Red Bull made a showing, and there was some Monster out there, but Mountain Dew and Pepsi are truly fighting for the hearts and minds of the local caffeine can tossers.

Now that we've discussed a little of the raw data from our second can counting location, the question quickly becomes one of beer economics.  What does a beer suitcase cost at the local seller, the Maverik?  And this is where things become very interesting.  Have you ever been inside the Maverik?  Half of the shop is taken up with beer suitcases.  I'm serious.  The variety of styles, sizes, and prices is boggling.  Right away this may explain the increase in can diversity at the local dump site.  I'm not saying that mass-market beer drinkers are too stupid to pick the best deal, but I am saying that I'm too stupid to do it.  There were at least seven different price points.  I had to put it all in a spreadsheet.

(When I went to the local Maverik to gather my price data I stood for a long time in front of the beer cooler.  Several people came and went.  Eventually I was standing there with a friendly young guy, covered in tattoos.  He said, "Choices, choices."  I am not kidding.  We switched places a couple of times.  He was trying to decide what to buy.  I was pretending.  Eventually we got to talking.  He'd worked for a time in California.  "Out there you can get all kinds of beer.  When I came back to Utah, I had to switch to whiskey.  Beer is just my chaser now."  He laughed.  "What you can do—with a beer bottle—is to drink the beer down to the bottom of the neck and then fill the neck with a shot of fireball whiskey.  It's awesome.  I can only do three or four of those in a row though."  We stepped past each other again.  "Hey," he said, "I guess I'll go with the Busch today."  He picked an 18 can suitcase for $9.99.  Smart.  Very smart.  Smarter than me.  By a lot.  I was still standing there trying to figure out how to do the math.)

	12 Can Suitcase	Cost/Can	18 Can Suitcase	Cost/Can	30 Can Suitcase	Cost/Can
Natural Light	6.99	0.58	9.99	0.56	17.99	0.60
Keystone Light	6.99	0.58	9.99	0.56	17.99	0.60
Busch Light	6.99	0.58	9.99	0.56	17.99	0.60
Busch	6.99	0.58	9.99	0.56	17.99	0.60
Bud Light	8.99	0.75	12.99	0.72	19.99	0.67
Coors Light	8.99	0.75	12.99	0.72	19.99	0.67
Budweiser	8.99	0.75	12.99	0.72	19.99	0.67
Milwaukee's Best	7.49	0.62	none		none

The spreadsheet results (above) start to tell the story.  They certainly explain, for example, the rise of Natty Light and Keystone Light at this data collection site.  The two combine for almost 100 cans, or almost a third of the trash.  It is, however, more difficult to tell what is going on with the Busch Brothers.  Given the price, it is hard to explain why they are languishing in the polls.  (Again, we admit to some missing pieces of information:  Perhaps Busch drinkers simply don't throw their cans in the ditch?)  The positions occupied by Bud and Bud Light correspond to what we found at the TA.  That is, those brands seem to be in a position to charge something of a premium among mass-market beer drinkers—without giving up a lot of sales volume.  They evidently hold a good market position.  In contrast to our first site, Coors Light, with a similar strategy, is doing a little better here.  Sort of holding its own.  But overall it doesn't have quite the selling power of the Buds.  Finally, while we find these data somewhat inconclusive, the distance of dumping from point of purchase is quite a bit different at this site.  Most of the cans go out at the one mile mark.  But this actually 2.5 miles from the point of sale.  (See the map in the prologue.)  Are Maverik beer buyers slower drinkers than those who frequent the TA?